The ONLY word for this is tragic

[P@triot]

And frankly, you seem to mistake "Freedom" for "Acting like a douchebag".

Folks, I rest my case. Goose-stepping Nazi Dumbocrats believe freedom equates to "acting like a douchebag" because you're not forced to do their bidding.

Because I want to opt out of Obamacare (while still leaving of for YOU) makes me a "douchebag"? I'm speechless...

 

[eagle1462010]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-dQfb8WQvo]Obama to Jane Sturm: Hey, take a pill - YouTube[/ame]

Riddle me this........................................

After being asked the question, he immediately goes in to MANAGING WASTE........................

Then ends with maybe she would be better off taking the pain pill..........................

In this ladies situation, the DOCTORS DECIDED if the surgery was possible NOT THE GOV'T. Under the ACA will they now have that same right for a 99 year old as in this situation.

Rationing HAPPENS in the countries with Universal Care. It is done as a matter of BUDGET. But that RATIONING IS VIA THE GOV'T, and not the case by case issue from the Doctors and patients.

It's 2 a.m. and Grandma is rushed to the hospital. She's 99, and needs care soon or will die. Will she have to wait for a BurroRAT to decide if the procedure is authorized, even if she could die while they decide.........................................Who the hell knows.

Obama says **** IT. Take the pill because you are too dang old anyway.

Don't get me going on this one. Because I really don't want to have to remember the scum bags who helped write's this laws OPINIONS ON THIS SUBJECT. I didn't like what they said back then, and wouldn't like what they said about it now.

 

[P@triot]

Guy, you keep mistaking ObamaCare for single payer.

Where do you get that?!? I've never claimed its single payer. Never. Not once. But I can't opt out of Obamacare. I must pay for it with crushing new taxes (over $4,000 additional taxes this year) and I must carry health insurance whether I want to or not.

I still have the same insurance I had before ObamaCare. And since ObamaCare, we stopped having those yearly meetings about how the coverage was going to be a little shittier than it was last year.

Well good for you. I'm glad for you. But I lost my previously exceptional insurance and thus I lost my doctor. How ironic that the person 100% happy with their healthcare lost it, and the person who has bitched about it day and night has the same insurance they've been bitching about. But that's what happens when government gets invovled - epic failure.

 

[eagle1462010]

Obamacare Is Turning Walmart Workers Into Temps - Forbes

It’s company directive, according to sources interviewed by Reuters who asked to remain anonymous.

“Full-time people are getting slimmer and slimmer,” said a supervisor at a store in North Carolina, who asked not to be named, as did other store-level employees who were interviewed for this story, because she is not authorized to talk to the media.

She said that the five new employees hired this year at the store are all temps and hours of existing employees are being cut.

“Everybody who comes through the door I hire as a temporary associate,” said a store manager in Alaska, who asked not to be identified. “It’s a company direction at the present time.”

Walmart was a proponent of Obamacare and its increasingly clear why, the retailer is shifting health care costs and responsibility to the state. It’s creepy move that has a lot of people upset, but it’s not illegal.

But it very well could backfire.

I don’t cover healthcare, but I know retail. Benefits and pay are moving targets and payroll gets manipulated depending on the weather (as weather actually impacts sales). In 2005, Walmart was pressured to provide health benefits to part-time workers and its closest competitor Target TGT +0.25% quickly followed suit.

In December, after backing Obamacare, Walmart announced it would no longer insure part time workers (Target still does). Since then, its part-time ranks have swelled, according to reports.

 

[P@triot]

On the other hand, Nataline's father didn't have a choice. Cigna was the company his employer chose. He could get another job, but Pre-ObamaCare, whatever insurance company he picked could have called Nataline's condition a "Pre-existing" condition and refused to pay for it. So he was kind of screwed either way.

You are either the most ignorant poster on USMB or you are the biggest liar on USMB (I suspect it's a lot of both).

It does not matter what company his employer chose for their health insurance plan. He always had a CHOICE. He could have turned down their plan and gone on his wife's. Or he could have turned down their plan and paid out of his own pocket (god forbid, right commie?) for the plan of his choosing. Or he could have actually read Cigna's plan and accepted it. He had OPTIONS. He had CHOICE. Something that you goose-stepping Nazi Dumbocrats hate and have now prevented with Obamacare.

 

[Foxfyre]

It could have been so simple. The federal government gets out of the healthcare business altogether and returns it to the states where it belonged.

The federal government works with and provides incentives to encourage state laws that will break up the insurance monopolies in the states so that the free market can work. The federal government provides incentives to move healthcare policy ownership from employers to employees. In other words, the employee owns his policy, it is completely portable, and the employer has the option to help pay the cost of it for employees as they now have the option to provide insurance coverage for employees.

Initiate sufficient tort reform so that once the government has cleared a procedure or drug for use, the pharmaceutical and medical supply companies have limited liability if some unforeseen side effect crops up.

Without the deep pockets of government to look to, all components of the healthcare will have to find ways to become more competitive and provide affordable healthcare. Otherwise they would have no market share at all.

Given the federal government's track record in managing much of anything, the naive assumption that more and more government control of healthcare will make anything better is short sighted at best, and insane at worst.

 

[rightwinger]

So, the answer to those that break the law, clog up ER, is to have you and me pay for their insurance? What a crime deterrent

-Geaux

Actually, it is

I don't want people dying in our streets, spreading diseases, giving birth in public restrooms just because they lack immigration papers

"Actually it is" a "crime deterrent" how is this deterring them from breaking the law when you're promising them FREE healthcare from the nation with the best healthcare?!? Do you even attempt to think before you go off half-cocked in a post?

By the way, nobody cares what you want. If you want it, why don't YOU PAY FOR IT?!?

Even before Obamacare, I paid for it. So did you.

Only we paid for emergency rooms instead of health clinics.

For all you "Let em die" conservatives

What exactly do you propose to do with the uninsured? You want them dying in the streets? Calcutta where we round up the dead in the morning?

is this a conservative America?

 

[P@triot]

Actually, it is

I don't want people dying in our streets, spreading diseases, giving birth in public restrooms just because they lack immigration papers

"Actually it is" a "crime deterrent" how is this deterring them from breaking the law when you're promising them FREE healthcare from the nation with the best healthcare?!? Do you even attempt to think before you go off half-cocked in a post?

By the way, nobody cares what you want. If you want it, why don't YOU PAY FOR IT?!?

Even before Obamacare, I paid for it. So did you.

Only we paid for emergency rooms instead of health clinics.

For all you "Let em die" conservatives

What exactly do you propose to do with the uninsured? You want them dying in the streets? Calcutta where we round up the dead in the morning?

is this a conservative America?

Here is what I propose: CRIMINALS (and that is exactly what they are) are rounded up and imprisoned. After a reasonable time incarcerated (which can be debated - I would say 5 years), they are deported back to their own ******* country. If they ever come back here illegally again, they are automatically imprisoned for life. While here, if they go to a hospital, they are REFUSED treatment of ANY kind. If they die - **** 'em. I could care less that we have one less CRIMINAL in the U.S. If they are imprisoned for life, they are also refused healthcare. Again, if they die while incarcerated - **** 'em. I have zero "compassion" for CRIMINALS.

For Americans that are uninsured - there is a simple solution. Your inability to pay today is no indication of your ability to pay tomorrow. So you are put on a payment plan and you pay what you can (even if that is $1 a week) until the entire cost is paid off. In addition to that, we have CHARITY assist with the cost. Bill Gates has spent around $30 billion of his own money on charity (without being FORCED by government). We have people *like* him (if he wants to of course), Warren Buffet, etc. (those uber elites, of their own free will) set up charitable foundations to assist with healthcare costs. Those exist today. We simply expand them by lowering taxes, getting government out of where it doesn't belong, and not paying healthcare for CRIMINALS.

That very simple proposal there would cause the cost of healthcare to drastically plummet (and there is much more I could propose but won't for the purposes of brevity). But you won't see one single person on the left support such a simple solution because it takes power and control away from the left. And despite their faux "compassion", the only thing they really care about is power & control.

 

[P@triot]

"I'd rather entrust the government of the United States to the first 400 people listed in the Boston telephone directory than to the faculty of Harvard University." -William F. Buckley, Jr.

The fact is, George W. Bush graduated from Yale, Barack Obama from Harvard, and if people were to be very honest with themselves, they would admit that neither one of these buffoons are fit to lead a nation.

The Ivy League certainly has its place. They produce great mathematicians, scientists, and doctors. But they can't produce leaders for shit. America needs to stop making the fatal assumption that because someone graduated from an Ivy League school, they are capable of any job. History has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, that simply is not the case. Our nations greatest Presidents (George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Ronald Reagan, etc.) did NOT attend an Ivy League school.

 

[Foxfyre]

"Actually it is" a "crime deterrent" how is this deterring them from breaking the law when you're promising them FREE healthcare from the nation with the best healthcare?!? Do you even attempt to think before you go off half-cocked in a post?

By the way, nobody cares what you want. If you want it, why don't YOU PAY FOR IT?!?

Even before Obamacare, I paid for it. So did you.

Only we paid for emergency rooms instead of health clinics.

For all you "Let em die" conservatives

What exactly do you propose to do with the uninsured? You want them dying in the streets? Calcutta where we round up the dead in the morning?

is this a conservative America?

Here is what I propose: CRIMINALS (and that is exactly what they are) are rounded up and imprisoned. After a reasonable time incarcerated (which can be debated - I would say 5 years), they are deported back to their own ******* country. If they ever come back here illegally again, they are automatically imprisoned for life. While here, if they go to a hospital, they are REFUSED treatment of ANY kind. If they die - **** 'em. I could care less that we have one less CRIMINAL in the U.S. If they are imprisoned for life, they are also refused healthcare. Again, if they die while incarcerated - **** 'em. I have zero "compassion" for CRIMINALS.

For Americans that are uninsured - there is a simple solution. Your inability to pay today is no indication of your ability to pay tomorrow. So you are put on a payment plan and you pay what you can (even if that is $1 a week) until the entire cost is paid off. In addition to that, we have CHARITY assist with the cost. Bill Gates has spent around $30 billion of his own money on charity (without being FORCED by government). We have people *like* him (if he wants to of course), Warren Buffet, etc. (those uber elites, of their own free will) set up charitable foundations to assist with healthcare costs. Those exist today. We simply expand them by lowering taxes, getting government out of where it doesn't belong, and not paying healthcare for CRIMINALS.

That very simple proposal there would cause the cost of healthcare to drastically plummet (and there is much more I could propose but won't for the purposes of brevity). But you won't see one single person on the left support such a simple solution because it takes power and control away from the left. And despite their faux "compassion", the only thing they really care about is power & control.

Well I'm not quite as tough as you Rottie, because I wouldn't refuse emergency care to anybody regardless of who they are. Hospitals and doctors never have refused emegency care to anybody and I worked in the business in four different communities before government seriously screwed up the system, so I can say that based on pesonal experience, up close and personal.

But those who showed up for care paid for that care or they got a bill and, as you recommended, a payment schedule to pay their bill.

But that was in the days when healthcare was handled pretty much like any other maintenance. We all paid out of pocket for our doctors' visits, the kids' shots, the x-ray for the possibly broken toe, etc. until we had satisfied a pretty hefty deductible and our insurance kicked in. And because we did pay for those pre-deductible expenses, our insurance was quite affordable. Most policies did pay for an annual checkup, even if the deductible had not been satisfied. Meanwhile we all were conscious of the costs and didn't abuse the system because we would only hurt ourselves if we did.

Such a system, most especially with the government providing some extra incentives by allowing tax free medical savings accounts, could work today just as efficiently and effectively.

For the uninsured with big expenses, there were the churches and other civic organizations who ran fund raisers and families came to the rescue. But no more died from lack of access to healthcare then than die now with all the socialist medicine we enjoy these days.

Yes, those who decided to buy a new car or take expensive vacations instead of buying health insurance sometimes got wiped out from a major accident or illness. But in those days, we operated under a concept that people choose whether or not to be responsible and accept the consequences if they do not choose wisely.

Again, there are so many ways to deal with healthcare costs by utilizing the free market system, I don't understand why anybody who values freedom would want to turn something as critical as their healthcare over to government to ration out to them.

 

[Geaux4it]

Screw it. Have insurance or you are on your own.

The law of nature

-Geaux

 

[P@triot]

Even before Obamacare, I paid for it. So did you.

Only we paid for emergency rooms instead of health clinics.

For all you "Let em die" conservatives

What exactly do you propose to do with the uninsured? You want them dying in the streets? Calcutta where we round up the dead in the morning?

is this a conservative America?

Here is what I propose: CRIMINALS (and that is exactly what they are) are rounded up and imprisoned. After a reasonable time incarcerated (which can be debated - I would say 5 years), they are deported back to their own ******* country. If they ever come back here illegally again, they are automatically imprisoned for life. While here, if they go to a hospital, they are REFUSED treatment of ANY kind. If they die - **** 'em. I could care less that we have one less CRIMINAL in the U.S. If they are imprisoned for life, they are also refused healthcare. Again, if they die while incarcerated - **** 'em. I have zero "compassion" for CRIMINALS.

For Americans that are uninsured - there is a simple solution. Your inability to pay today is no indication of your ability to pay tomorrow. So you are put on a payment plan and you pay what you can (even if that is $1 a week) until the entire cost is paid off. In addition to that, we have CHARITY assist with the cost. Bill Gates has spent around $30 billion of his own money on charity (without being FORCED by government). We have people *like* him (if he wants to of course), Warren Buffet, etc. (those uber elites, of their own free will) set up charitable foundations to assist with healthcare costs. Those exist today. We simply expand them by lowering taxes, getting government out of where it doesn't belong, and not paying healthcare for CRIMINALS.

That very simple proposal there would cause the cost of healthcare to drastically plummet (and there is much more I could propose but won't for the purposes of brevity). But you won't see one single person on the left support such a simple solution because it takes power and control away from the left. And despite their faux "compassion", the only thing they really care about is power & control.

Well I'm not quite as tough as you Rottie, because I wouldn't refuse emergency care to anybody regardless of who they are. Hospitals and doctors never have refused emegency care to anybody and I worked in the business in four different communities before government seriously screwed up the system, so I can say that based on pesonal experience, up close and personal.

But those who showed up for care paid for that care or they got a bill and, as you recommended, a payment schedule to pay their bill.

But that was in the days when healthcare was handled pretty much like any other maintenance. We all paid out of pocket for our doctors' visits, the kids' shots, the x-ray for the possibly broken toe, etc. until we had satisfied a pretty hefty deductible and our insurance kicked in. And because we did pay for those pre-deductible expenses, our insurance was quite affordable. Most policies did pay for an annual checkup, even if the deductible had not been satisfied. Meanwhile we all were conscious of the costs and didn't abuse the system because we would only hurt ourselves if we did.

Such a system, most especially with the government providing some extra incentives by allowing tax free medical savings accounts, could work today just as efficiently and effectively.

For the uninsured with big expenses, there were the churches and other civic organizations who ran fund raisers and families came to the rescue. But no more died from lack of access to healthcare then than die now with all the socialist medicine we enjoy these days.

Yes, those who decided to buy a new car or take expensive vacations instead of buying health insurance sometimes got wiped out from a major accident or illness. But in those days, we operated under a concept that people choose whether or not to be responsible and accept the consequences if they do not choose wisely.

Again, there are so many ways to deal with healthcare costs by utilizing the free market system, I don't understand why anybody who values freedom would want to turn something as critical as their healthcare over to government to ration out to them.

Well you just said - they don't value freedom. They only thing the left "leaders" care about is power & control. And the only thing the left minions care about is getting free shit so they don't have to work and provide for themselves.

And that is why this country is going to shit. That is why we have less freedoms and more taxes than ever in our history.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Funny - last night you claimed I was "mean" and you weren't going to "stoop to my level". Today you've thrown at least 3 insults in every post.

Poodle, pointing out a fact isn't an insult. Deal with it. Come on, out with it, how old are you and how long have you actually been in the workforce.

[
First of all, defense is a Constitutional responsibility of the federal government. It provides FREEDOM. The same FREEDOM that affords you the luxury to spend your life bitching and crying about the United States. And even though you abuse that FREEDOM more than anyone, you still don't have to pay for it. The U.S. gives you the FREEDOM to leave any time you want.

Guy, I got no problem paying for defense.

Invading Iraq wasn't "Defense". Iraq wasn't a threat to us. They didn't even do what we had accused them of. The Oil Companies and Zionists wanted Saddam gone, but he wasn't bothering most of us.

Second point, the same constitution that calls for "the common Defense" also calls for "Promote general welfare". Well, making sure every citizen has access to health care falls under that.

Second, the only reason I pay for this stuff now is because government decided several decades ago that a doctor is a slave and must perform their labor even if the recipient of that labor is unable to pay for it (brilliant) . Now that we've had several decades to see that government interference has created a catastrophe, moron's like you declare that we need more government! Because, you know - it's always good to add more of the problem to a problem.

Can you say Who Is John Galt?

Wow, you really are a fan of Ayn Rand's Horseshit!!!!

Guy, the government didn't make a doctor a slave. The Doctors did that themselves when they took something called a Hippocratic oath. It's his duty to heal the sick.

Most of the world, doctors are not compensated as well as they are in the US. They are actually in it because they want to heal the sick.

So one more time, are you willing to let a poor child die because her parents can't pay for treatment?

 

[JoeB131]

On the other hand, Nataline's father didn't have a choice. Cigna was the company his employer chose. He could get another job, but Pre-ObamaCare, whatever insurance company he picked could have called Nataline's condition a "Pre-existing" condition and refused to pay for it. So he was kind of screwed either way.

You are either the most ignorant poster on USMB or you are the biggest liar on USMB (I suspect it's a lot of both).

It does not matter what company his employer chose for their health insurance plan. He always had a CHOICE. He could have turned down their plan and gone on his wife's. Or he could have turned down their plan and paid out of his own pocket (god forbid, right commie?) for the plan of his choosing. Or he could have actually read Cigna's plan and accepted it. He had OPTIONS. He had CHOICE. Something that you goose-stepping Nazi Dumbocrats hate and have now prevented with Obamacare.

Okay, a whole lot of conditions there you can't prove.

Did his wife even work?
Did his wife's company even offer insurance?
Did his wife's company have an insurance company that was just as Evil as Cigna?
Could he really have afforded a $350,000 treatment out of pocket?
Would a bank have fronted him that kind of money?

Frankly, you are saying, "Well, you should trust a big corporation, but totally accept it when a big corporation cheats you, because Ayn Rand says so!"

Point was, he took a job and paid a co-pay and worked for a company with the promise of insurance to cover his family, and Lexus and Cigna didn't come through for him.

And then you are REALLY surprised when people vote to put a stop to that sort of shit? Really?

 

[JoeB131]

And frankly, you seem to mistake "Freedom" for "Acting like a douchebag".

Folks, I rest my case. Goose-stepping Nazi Dumbocrats believe freedom equates to "acting like a douchebag" because you're not forced to do their bidding.

Because I want to opt out of Obamacare (while still leaving of for YOU) makes me a "douchebag"? I'm speechless...

Yeah, guy, you really are a douchebag.

Has nothing to do with freedom. You live in a civilized society. Civilized societies have rules. What you want is the BENEFITS of living in a civilized society without any of the RESPONSIBIITIES.

I can kind of see why real rich people think this way, but since I doubt you even have a job, I'm not sure why you do.

 

[P@triot]

Poodle, pointing out a fact isn't an insult. Deal with it. Come on, out with it, how old are you and how long have you actually been in the workforce.

I take it you are schizophrenic? The other night you practically crying like a little girl about insults. Today you are "big tough guy" with your "deal with it" rhetoric. And since all I did was point out the fact that you are indeed stupid (and even you know that much), then we both agree that I was not insulting you.

Guy, I got no problem paying for defense. Invading Iraq wasn't "Defense". Iraq wasn't a threat to us. They didn't even do what we had accused them of.

Really? Oh wow - I didn't realize your top secret national security clearance had granted you access to that information. Hey everybody - JoeB. says Saddam Hussein wasn't a threat to us... you can all go home now. Turn off your tv's and pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. JoeB. has his finger on the pulse of national security and he has declared "all clear"

Do you have any idea at all how immature you are? You literally get all of your information from Hollywood. It's time you put down the Oliver Stone DVD and take off the tin foil hat. The left is so deeply incompetent, they cling to just a couple of buzz words and concepts that they teach each other. To "fix" the economy, the only "idea" they have is the comical "invest in infrastructure" (even though none of them know what infrastructure means without looking it up and wonder how many of them don't even know what invest means) and to explain the Iraq war they cry "we did it for oil" (believing they have some classified insight into a top secret conspiracy ).

Except there is one problem with that conspiracy which gives all of you a "Chris Matthews tingle up your leg" feeling: we didn't keep any oil. After capturing Saddam Hussein and destroying his army, we handed the oil fields, Saddam, and Iraq back to the Iraqi's. Duh...my name is JoeB. and simple facts allude me because my tin foil hat is interfering with the natural electrical signals of my brain...

Second point, the same constitution that calls for "the common Defense" also calls for "Promote general welfare". Well, making sure every citizen has access to health care falls under that.

First of all, promote does not mean provide. Promote means to set the environment for success - like low taxes, limited regulations, and protecting intellectual property (one of the 18 enumerated powers of the federal government incidentally). So that is Epic Fail #1

Second, what Obamacare has done is eschew the GENERAL for the extreme MINORITY. The GENERAL population had health insurance you ****'n moron. The worst case estimates were that 30 million American's did not have health insurance. Well, if that were true, that means 300 million American's (or a monumental 10x's as many) had health insurance. So you're take on "promote the GENERAL welfare" is to **** over the overwhelming majority for the extreme few? Really? That is Epic Fail #2

Wow, you really are a fan of Ayn Rand's Horseshit!!!!

Dumbocrats implement Medicare & Medicaid (citing a "crisis") in 1967 under Lyndon B. Johnson and against the warnings and the will of the Republicans. Fast forward a few decades and Barack Obama stands on a dozen stages for a year repeating over and over and over that Medicare and Medicaid are "broke" and something must be done. The Dumbocrats "solution" to their inability to handle their interference in a small portion of the healthcare system is to interfere in a larger portion of the healthcare system. That was the exact premise of Ayn Rand's warnings!

Leave it to JoeB. to refer to reality as "horseshit". God Bless this intellectually inferior buffoon. He tries so hard to sound even a little smart. He really does. You have to give him credit for effort, even if the results (like his life) is an overwhelming F-.

Guy, the government didn't make a doctor a slave. The Doctors did that themselves when they took something called a Hippocratic oath. It's his duty to heal the sick.

When then the Hippocratic Oath is unconstitutional because the Constitution outlaws slavery and the Constitution trumps all other law. So again, epic fail. You lose in your very weak attempt to sound "smart".

Most of the world, doctors are not compensated as well as they are in the US. They are actually in it because they want to heal the sick.

And the U.S. is better than most of the world. In fact, the U.S. is better than ALL of the world. Which is why, for all of your bitching & crying about it, you refuse to leave the U.S. and go live in any one of these countries that you pretend are soooo "wonderful".

So one more time, are you willing to let a poor child die because her parents can't pay for treatment?

So one more time, are you willing to pay for a poor child dying out of your own pocket instead of trying to force others? No? Yeah, didn't think so. Because you don't really care about the children. Like all Dumbocrats, the only thing you care about is yourself and your greed.

 

[P@triot]

On the other hand, Nataline's father didn't have a choice. Cigna was the company his employer chose. He could get another job, but Pre-ObamaCare, whatever insurance company he picked could have called Nataline's condition a "Pre-existing" condition and refused to pay for it. So he was kind of screwed either way.

You are either the most ignorant poster on USMB or you are the biggest liar on USMB (I suspect it's a lot of both).

It does not matter what company his employer chose for their health insurance plan. He always had a CHOICE. He could have turned down their plan and gone on his wife's. Or he could have turned down their plan and paid out of his own pocket (god forbid, right commie?) for the plan of his choosing. Or he could have actually read Cigna's plan and accepted it. He had OPTIONS. He had CHOICE. Something that you goose-stepping Nazi Dumbocrats hate and have now prevented with Obamacare.

Okay, a whole lot of conditions there you can't prove.

Did his wife even work? If she didn't, she made the CHOICE not to
Did his wife's company even offer insurance? If not, she made the CHOICE to work for a company that didn't offer insurance.
Did his wife's company have an insurance company that was just as Evil as Cigna? Again, she made the CHOICE to work there
Could he really have afforded a $350,000 treatment out of pocket? It doesn't cost $350K to make the CHOICE to carry your own insurance
Would a bank have fronted him that kind of money? No bank required for out of pocket insurance

Point was, he took a job and paid a co-pay and worked for a company with the promise of insurance to cover his family, and Lexus and Cigna didn't come through for him.

Wow...talk about "conditions you CAN'T prove". When did Lexus and Cigna promise to "cover" his family?!? They offered health insurance with limitations. His failure to read the policy contract (and your ignorance to refuse to accept the fact that this girl was simply dying) does not justify communism for the U.S.

Incidentally, I noticed that you didn't step up and offer to pay for this poor girl in her desperate time of need. I guess your computer and internet subscription so that you could go on USMB and ***** like a teenage girl 24x7 was more important to you, uh? Typical...

 

[P@triot]

And frankly, you seem to mistake "Freedom" for "Acting like a douchebag".

Folks, I rest my case. Goose-stepping Nazi Dumbocrats believe freedom equates to "acting like a douchebag" because you're not forced to do their bidding.

Because I want to opt out of Obamacare (while still leaving of for YOU) makes me a "douchebag"? I'm speechless...

Yeah, guy, you really are a douchebag.

Has nothing to do with freedom. You live in a civilized society. Civilized societies have rules. What you want is the BENEFITS of living in a civilized society without any of the RESPONSIBIITIES.

I can kind of see why real rich people think this way, but since I doubt you even have a job, I'm not sure why you do.

It has everything to do with freedom. Your opinion if what constitutes a "douchebag" does not trump my Constitutional freedoms. Your opinion of what constitutes a "civilized society" does not trump my Constitutional freedoms.

Also ass-wipe, I'm the one who is screaming PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. You're the little ***** who wants Larry Ellison to pay your way through life for you

I want no BENEFITS. I want the RESPONSIBILITY to be left the **** alone and have to survive on my own. The only question is, why doesn't your crying, whining, lazy ass want the same thing?

 

[Foxfyre]

And then there is always the concern that you don't base the policy or structure or needs of an entire nation on the situation or predicament of a very few as that is always going to be destructive to the free market and will eventually hurt everybody, even those you intend to help.

Had the federal government been concerned about people not being able to get insurance, it could have set up its own insurance exchange similiar to national flood or earthquake insurance. That would have been far less costly to the taxpayer than dragging every human on the planet into a perfectly good free market system and totally screwing it up.

As previously posted, there are a lot of things the federal government could have done in the interest of the general welfare to help the free market work better in healthcare and that would have helped everybody, rich and poor alike.

The government can do some things right; i.e. apply anti trust laws and implement necessary regulation to prevent the states from doing economic or physical violence to each other. But it doesn't run programs well and shouldn't even try.

 

[JoeB131]

Poodle, pointing out a fact isn't an insult. Deal with it. Come on, out with it, how old are you and how long have you actually been in the workforce.

I take it you are schizophrenic? The other night you practically crying like a little girl about insults. Today you are "big tough guy" with your "deal with it" rhetoric. And since all I did was point out the fact that you are indeed stupid (and even you know that much), then we both agree that I was not insulting you.

Not that I thought you were going to answer the question, but how was asking a simple question- not screaming that someone is a communist or stupid- but a simple question of how old are you and how much have you paid in taxes over a lifetime- insulting you, exactly.

The fact you are unwilling to give a straight up answer speaks volumes.

[

Guy, I got no problem paying for defense. Invading Iraq wasn't "Defense". Iraq wasn't a threat to us. They didn't even do what we had accused them of.

Really? Oh wow - I didn't realize your top secret national security clearance had granted you access to that information. Hey everybody - JoeB. says Saddam Hussein wasn't a threat to us... you can all go home now. Turn off your tv's and pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. JoeB. has his finger on the pulse of national security and he has declared "all clear"

Guy, Bush made two presenations to the American people.

1) Saddam had weapons of mass destruction (he didn't.)
2) Saddam was working with Bin Laden (he wasn't.)

As such, going to war with him was NOT defense as you've defined it.

Do you have any idea at all how immature you are? You literally get all of your information from Hollywood. It's time you put down the Oliver Stone DVD and take off the tin foil hat. The left is so deeply incompetent, they cling to just a couple of buzz words and concepts that they teach each other. To "fix" the economy, the only "idea" they have is the comical "invest in infrastructure" (even though none of them know what infrastructure means without looking it up and wonder how many of them don't even know what invest means) and to explain the Iraq war they cry "we did it for oil" (believing they have some classified insight into a top secret conspiracy ).

Except there is one problem with that conspiracy which gives all of you a "Chris Matthews tingle up your leg" feeling: we didn't keep any oil. After capturing Saddam Hussein and destroying his army, we handed the oil fields, Saddam, and Iraq back to the Iraqi's. Duh...my name is JoeB. and simple facts allude me because my tin foil hat is interfering with the natural electrical signals of my brain...

We set up a puppet government and the big oil companies were doing business in Iraq again. Um, yeah, they benefitted. So did the Zionists, who wanted Saddam gone and he was gone.

What we didn't get was the WMD's Bush insisted were there.

First of all, promote does not mean provide. Promote means to set the environment for success - like low taxes, limited regulations, and protecting intellectual property (one of the 18 enumerated powers of the federal government incidentally). So that is Epic Fail #1

Again, the constitution doesn't prohibit a universal health care.

Second, what Obamacare has done is eschew the GENERAL for the extreme MINORITY. The GENERAL population had health insurance you ****'n moron. The worst case estimates were that 30 million American's did not have health insurance. Well, if that were true, that means 300 million American's (or a monumental 10x's as many) had health insurance. So you're take on "promote the GENERAL welfare" is to **** over the overwhelming majority for the extreme few? Really? That is Epic Fail #2

Please explain how the "General" are losing health insurance because of ObamaCare. Because, guy, it ain't happening. Oh, a few companies are dropping health care, but they were doing that before Obamacare came along.

Dumbocrats implement Medicare & Medicaid (citing a "crisis") in 1967 under Lyndon B. Johnson and against the warnings and the will of the Republicans. Fast forward a few decades and Barack Obama stands on a dozen stages for a year repeating over and over and over that Medicare and Medicaid are "broke" and something must be done. The Dumbocrats "solution" to their inability to handle their interference in a small portion of the healthcare system is to interfere in a larger portion of the healthcare system. That was the exact premise of Ayn Rand's warnings!

Well, good thing for that old bag Ayn she did, because at the end of her miserable, selfish life, after her husband dumped her and most of her fans forgot her, she had to rely on Medicare and Social Security to live.

When then the Hippocratic Oath is unconstitutional because the Constitution outlaws slavery and the Constitution trumps all other law. So again, epic fail. You lose in your very weak attempt to sound "smart".

Guy, you need to get over your Constitutional Fetishism. The constitution means what people think it ought to mean. We have an expectation of medical professionals. It's why we call them "Doctors"...

This really does get to the heart of the argument. Is health care a consumer good or a public service. Most sensible, sane people think it should be a public service.

And then there are people who think that selfishness is a virtue. Like you and Ayn.

[

Most of the world, doctors are not compensated as well as they are in the US. They are actually in it because they want to heal the sick.

And the U.S. is better than most of the world. In fact, the U.S. is better than ALL of the world. Which is why, for all of your bitching & crying about it, you refuse to leave the U.S. and go live in any one of these countries that you pretend are soooo "wonderful".

Why would I want to do that, when we can fix this county and expunge you hateful little selfish ***** and make you pay for our healthcare? Frankly, you make my argument for higher taxes for me.

[

So one more time, are you willing to let a poor child die because her parents can't pay for treatment?

So one more time, are you willing to pay for a poor child dying out of your own pocket instead of trying to force others? No? Yeah, didn't think so. Because you don't really care about the children. Like all Dumbocrats, the only thing you care about is yourself and your greed.

Guy, as I've said, I've probably paid more taxes lifetime than you ever will.

My guess is I have ties that are older than you.

But to the point, I would bet that if you let people pick where their tax money goes, paying for medical treatment for the poor would get funded long before Wars for Oil and Welfare for Zionists, your favorite programs.